2022
DOI: 10.1177/00420980221124456
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Regressive revenue sourcing by local governments

Abstract: Emerging work in fiscal sociology examines the intersection of race/ethnicity, inequality and taxation, and suggests that localities are increasingly turning to nontax alternatives such as fines, fees and forfeitures to fill revenue gaps and service demands. These revenue sources are regressive and discriminatory as they disproportionately affect low-income racially/ethnically minoritised groups. We assess the extent to which local municipalities in California are more dependent on regressive nontax revenue so… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 49 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…More narrowly, researchers have also examined two important potential rationales for the expansive use of fines and fees: first, that fines and fees are a deterrent to future crime; and second, that fines and fees are a kind of "reverse welfare" used to finance local and municipal governments [26][27][28][29]. The use of fines and fees as an alternative source of revenue, in particular, has been the subject of significant attention, with a number of studies finding that local governments rely more on fines and fees in times of financial distress [30,31]. Importantly, previous work suggests that the empirical basis for both the "deterrence" and "alternative revenue source" rationales for levying heavy fines and fees are weak.…”
Section: The Criminalization Of Povertymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…More narrowly, researchers have also examined two important potential rationales for the expansive use of fines and fees: first, that fines and fees are a deterrent to future crime; and second, that fines and fees are a kind of "reverse welfare" used to finance local and municipal governments [26][27][28][29]. The use of fines and fees as an alternative source of revenue, in particular, has been the subject of significant attention, with a number of studies finding that local governments rely more on fines and fees in times of financial distress [30,31]. Importantly, previous work suggests that the empirical basis for both the "deterrence" and "alternative revenue source" rationales for levying heavy fines and fees are weak.…”
Section: The Criminalization Of Povertymentioning
confidence: 99%